Noyce Program Evaluation Group Our evaluation project has four major components: –Preparation of an extensive literature review pertaining to recruitment and retention –Thematic synthesis through content analysis of project information –Statistical analyses to produce quantitative models of the program development –Execution of an overall program evaluation plan through collaboration (participatory approach) with existing projects.

Methodology: Data sources Surveys –PI online survey (N=66) –Scholar online survey (N=555) –Disciplinary faculty online survey (N=80) Interviews –Scholars in progress (N=12) –Districts in progress (N= 17) Monitoring data collected for NSF Self-response bias

Methodology: Analyses Frequencies, cross tabs, means Open-ended responses categorization Factor and cluster analyses Regression and HLM analyses using 3 outcome variables: –Factor score: Commitment to teaching in high needs school (Influence of Noyce) –Would you have become a teacher if you hadn’t received the Noyce scholarship? –Would you have decided to teach in a high need school if you hadn’t participated in the Noyce scholarship program?

Project overview 75 active Noyce projects with 88% of the projects responding –Of the 9 non-responding PIs, 7 were in their first or second year and subsequently had no data to report Projects in 29 states responded, with 12 responding from Texas Total of 141 strands reported with an average 1 or 2 teacher education strands per responding PI –8 strands was the maximum –Strand breakdown: 49 Undergraduate program leading to a bachelor’s degree (34.8%) 17 Teaching credential (no degree) (12.1%) 27 Post-bac or graduate program (no master’s awarded) (19.1%) 27 Graduate program (19.1%) 21 Other (14.9%)

Funded activities Miscellaneous Meetings Mentoring PI Sec II Q 1, number of respondents for each item ranged from 65 to 56.

Project overview Of the 555 scholars responding to the survey: –46% were teaching full-time/part-time –31% were still in their certification program but not yet a full-time teacher –13% were still in their program but also teaching full-time –8% completed a program but never taught –1% left their program without completing certification –1% taught after being certified and were working in education but not as teachers –1% taught after being certified but were no longing working in education

Effect of Noyce scholarship on teaching Would you have become a teacher if you had not received the Noyce Scholarship? Would you have taught in a high needs school if you hadn’t participated in the Noyce program? Yes Possibly No I will not teach in a high needs school Scholar Sec IV Q6 (n = 543) & Q7 (n = 542)

Ability of STEM majors who intend to teach compared to those that do not Fac Q4 (n = 80)

Career changers and high needs teaching Teaching high needs school Teaching another type of school Career changers Non-career changers Scholar Sec III Q1 & Sec V Q4, career changers (n=267), non-career changers (n=265)

Program type and timing of teaching decision Scholars Sec I Q1 &Sec IV Q 4, Before (n=74), After (n=469)

Influence of Noyce money on potential commitments Scholar Sec IV Q8, respondents vary from 543 to 534

Education about how to work in high needs schools Yes to high needs education No to high needs education High needs student teaching experience No high needs student teaching experience Scholar Sec II Q1, high needs experience (n = 163); no high needs experience (n = 380)

Factor analysis results of Noyce scholar survey Constructed FactorCronbach’s Alpha Number of Items Commitment to teaching in a high needs school (influence of Noyce) Preparation for high needs school Path to teaching District/school high needs environment Personal beliefs towards teaching School teaching environment Mentoring experience * Please see the attached laminated sheet for more details.

Influence of funding on timing of teaching decision Would you have become a teacher if you had not received the Noyce scholarship? (2, N=542) = , p<0.001 (Scholar Sec IV Q4) (Scholar Sec IV Q6)

School district representatives perceptions of Noyce * Please see the attached laminated sheet for more details.

District model highlights “Recruitment pipeline” –Many participants commented that they valued the Noyce program for bringing a higher number of qualified STEM teachers into their schools. Valued qualities of Noyce scholars: sense of purpose and “mission” –Some participants mentioned they perceived a stronger sense of purpose in Noyce scholars compared to other teachers which they believed positively affected their teaching in an urban setting and commitment to urban education. Relationship with Noyce programs –Many participants commented that their relationship with the teacher preparation programs had not changed or only changed minimally with the Noyce program. The relationship in some cases was “enhanced”, but did not affect the districts significantly.

District interview quotes “Recruitment pipeline” One participant mentioned that without the Noyce program, “It would limit the pool of highly qualified math and science teachers and to me, it would hurt because the pool has been shrinking or has shrunk for math/science teachers. The Noyce scholarship just gives us another avenue of having a pool of qualified candidates to be able to become highly qualified teachers in our schools” Valued qualities of Noyce Scholars: Sense of purpose and “mission” “I have not met one that isn’t truly, I don’t want to use the word idealistic, but they want to teach and they have made commitments to go into such a school and that shows a lot about the quality of the person.” Relationship with Noyce Program Regarding how Noyce had changed the district’s work with the teacher preparation program, one participant commented, “From our end, not so much, because already [the teacher preparation institution] has a pretty strong commitment or partnership with the district... It’s pretty strong. Already, we get quite a few teachers from that program.”